Agreed! I was shaking my head at the mouldy popcorn theory when I listened to that episode of Uncanny. You've done an excellent job articulating how frustrating, unsatisfying (and even silly) some of these supposedly "scientific" alternative explanations can be when they are bandied about in a paranormal entertainment context that lacks scientific rigor and standards. Also, when token skeptics are asked to quickly and succinctly offer a debunking without the time to dig deeper into the evidence, and into what other evidence is needed, I think it sets them up to look foolish or be easily dismissed by those motivated to disregard non-paranormal explanations. Podcasts are fast-paced and pithy, but science is not!
I totally agree. I was a contributor to Season 1 of the Uncanny podcast and I really didn't feel like I was able to do a proper job of understanding and offering insights into the cases so turned down future seasons because although speculation is a good starting point, it's exactly that.
I do sympathise with Ciarán a bit. He really doesn’t have much information to go on beyond it was dark and they were driving home from the cinema. I get the impression that he’s trying to drip feed these different concepts into the wider conversation rather than address the specific cases themselves. It would get a bit tedious if every answer was ‘Yeah, you were tired, it was late, and the mind plays tricks’. I think he’s playing the longer game.
Agreed! I was shaking my head at the mouldy popcorn theory when I listened to that episode of Uncanny. You've done an excellent job articulating how frustrating, unsatisfying (and even silly) some of these supposedly "scientific" alternative explanations can be when they are bandied about in a paranormal entertainment context that lacks scientific rigor and standards. Also, when token skeptics are asked to quickly and succinctly offer a debunking without the time to dig deeper into the evidence, and into what other evidence is needed, I think it sets them up to look foolish or be easily dismissed by those motivated to disregard non-paranormal explanations. Podcasts are fast-paced and pithy, but science is not!
I totally agree. I was a contributor to Season 1 of the Uncanny podcast and I really didn't feel like I was able to do a proper job of understanding and offering insights into the cases so turned down future seasons because although speculation is a good starting point, it's exactly that.
I do sympathise with Ciarán a bit. He really doesn’t have much information to go on beyond it was dark and they were driving home from the cinema. I get the impression that he’s trying to drip feed these different concepts into the wider conversation rather than address the specific cases themselves. It would get a bit tedious if every answer was ‘Yeah, you were tired, it was late, and the mind plays tricks’. I think he’s playing the longer game.